What follows is merely my personal opinion. All respect to those who feel differently. And I could be wrong.

None of this is likely to matter. It's not likely to change anything if it's found that Obama wasn't born in the U.S. Regardless of who is president,
I doubt anything will change. This is just part of the cycle that seemingly repeats endlessly in American politics. That cycle seems to be as
follows.

Candidate from party A is elected.

Under that administration, wealth is transferred from the lower and middle class to the upper class, military operations are carried out, thousands
die, and civil rights are further curtailed in the name of security.

Candidate from party B campaigns against these policies, promising fundamental change.

Candidate from party B is elected.

Under that administration, different language, tone, and tactics are employed, but ultimately, wealth is transferred from the lower and
middle class to the upper class, military operations are carried out, thousands die, and civil rights are further curtailed in the name of
security.

Candidate from party A, not as readily being able to assail the incumbent as they were able to assail them because of their different tactics and
language, instead uses mud slinging and character assassination (warranted or not) in order to secure the election. They also promise not to continue
these policies, and to bring about fundamental change.

Candidate from party A is elected.

Under that administration, wealth is transferred from the lower and middle class to the upper class, military operations are carried out, thousands
die, and civil rights are further curtailed in the name of security.

Notice a pattern? I've been through quite a few party cycles now - not just election cycles and administrations, but representatives of the two
"different" parties holding office so as to contrast the two - and ultimately, not much changes regardless of who's "in power." The outward intent,
tactics, language, and tone change. The results, to varying degrees, always move the same agendas in the same directions. Which party is in power just
seems to depend on which version or degree of the same process people are most weary of. If people are weary of hawks and unitary executive theory,
they elect Democrats (even though the same legal theory is used by both parties to justify the same agendas, perhaps to slightly differing degrees
only.) If people are weary of liberal policies or scandals, they elect Republicans (even though both parties are rife with corruption and scandal, and
both advance the same economic and foreign agendas seemingly, if only to differing degrees.)

So in my opinion, this birth certificate issue - whether legitimate or not - is a tactic intended to help repeat this cycle yet again. Obama hasn't
delivered the fundamental change he promised, we're embroiled in another conflict, the economy - while improving - isn't out the woods yet, and
fundamentally, it suffers from inflation and the well known corporate shell game that cannot continue indefinitely. No president can solve that one,
because it's endemic, and necessary for the capitalist system to function in its present form. So, people will elect a Republican. If not this time,
then in 2016. Then people will grow weary of them doing the same things in different ways, and elect a Democrat again.

The choices we seem to have aren't really choices at all. The attacks on one "side" by the other are just tactics, regardless of whether they're based
in truth or not. They don't care about the truth or about liberating the people from the yoke of dishonesty. They care about regaining power for
themselves. That's what both sides care about. And the special interests who win them the elections and help them get the legislature they pass
passed, don't care who gets it. They only care that their agendas are advanced. And they are being advanced, and will continue to be advanced. So
while we cheer for one side's attacks against the other because we think they will deliver us from whoever the current incumbent administration is,
they're just asking themselves, "okay how do we utilize the next administration to get this done?" They see it fundamentally differently than we do,
because these are multi-national corporations with no loyalty to any specific nation, ideology, or party. (Save perhaps their own, if they have
one.)

Again, I could be wrong. This is just my (current) opinion. And it changes often.

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
I am sure that once this "Trump Issue" is cleared, we will hear of something beneficial for him by the Feds...

Oh, honey, don't get your hopes up. I hope you're right, but if the past is any indication, this will not resolve anything.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Most notably it was used against John McCain this election, also Dick Cheney, Barry Goldwater, George Romney in 1968, Kissinger, Albright and
others.

None of whom are previous presidents.

As I have said before many times, I FULLY support a process by which EVERY presidential candidate and anyone in line for the presidency has to prove
that they are eligible to serve in that position. THAT process has my full support. But I do not support a witch hunt whose sole purpose is to bring
down a president because of disagreements with his policies or "questions and suspicions" about his past. And I do not support stripping a president
of his privacy rights just because of internet rumors started by those whose agenda was to bring down said president.

Do you think I haven't read that stuff? Where have you been for the past 4 years?

(Sorry, it's just that I'm one of the most vocal members
on this side of this debate and I read EVERYTHING). And it's still true what I said: In all my searches, I have never found a previous president's
birth certificate on the Internet.

Originally posted by jibeho
Perhaps, Obama's coolness on the issue can be explained by the existence of another US born father who wished to remain anonymous.

Yes, that's possible. That doesn't make him ineligible for president, though and is really none of our business.

But I do not support a witch hunt whose sole purpose is to bring down a president because of disagreements with his policies or "questions and
suspicions" about his past. And I do not support stripping a president of his privacy rights just because of internet rumors started by those whose
agenda was to bring down said president.

Agreed!

I also do not support this agenda for the purpose of bringing down a sitting president and undoing any of the things he did while in office.

HOWEVER,
Now that he has announced his campaign for re-election, he is a candidate again just like the rest of them, so this should be fairgame before the next
election rolls around.

I won't support an impeachment, but I will support keeping him off the ballots if he can't prove he is eligible.

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
... what about newspapers? Do you include it in?

I don't read the paper. I am not aware of any previous president's BC being in a newspaper.

was the Birthers movement started by southerners, or northerners?

As far as I know, no one really knows who started it. There are a few suspects. Someone in Hillary's camp maybe or WND. There's another guy, but I
forget his name, who supposedly started it as soon as Obama announced his campaign. But I don't know who started it. I'm not sure what southern or
northern has to do with anything...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Now that he has announced his campaign for re-election, he is a candidate again just like the rest of them, so this should be fairgame before
the next election rolls around.

What should be fair game? I don't think I understand what you mean. If you mean that Obama should meet the same requirements as the other candidates,
I absolutely agree 100%! He's a candidate and should be treated like all the other candidates.
.

Do you think I haven't read that stuff? Where have you been for the past 4 years?

(Sorry, it's just that I'm one of the most vocal members on
this side of this debate and I read EVERYTHING). And it's still true what I said: In all my searches, I have never found a previous president's birth
certificate on the Internet.

Originally posted by jibeho
Perhaps, Obama's coolness on the issue can be explained by the existence of another US born father who wished to remain anonymous.

Yes, that's possible. That doesn't make him ineligible for president, though and is really none of our business.

I am fully aware of your knowledge. That's why I asked you the question. But I got no relevant reply.

Regarding other presidents in recent history... There has never been a reason to doubt their stories. Obama's story is full of inconsistencies and
deliberate dead ends and red herrings. It's human nature to want to dig deeper when you have been deliberately prohibited to do so. The man travels
with "the football" and yet we know nothing about him. blah blah blah I'm wasting my breath.

Regarding the nature of who Obama's father may be... It is our business especially if the story that we have been told is a lie. His book would then
be based on lies and deception and utter fraud. But, that is irrelevant in your eyes because that's none of my beeswax. This is about the truth.
The truth and the need for Obama to obfuscate it. You know what those inconsistencies are and you deliberately disregard them.

It's all relevant in the quest for truth.

Time to dunk my head in a tub of cold water.

ETA
I can play the source game too. Media Matters??

Quite the site they've got going there. I am surprised that took a break from Fox News and
Glenn Beck to even post some "obama truths" . Good one.

This whole case began to crack when inquiring minds began to research the candidate who came from NOWHERE. Human nature. Inconsistencies began to
surface and on and on it went. All fueled by Obama and his camp.

Just show the birth certificate and all this goes away.... why is that so hard? Why is it so hard for him to come out and show it? Why not show it?
This isnt about racism or that people dont like his policies..... its about show the birth certificate. Thats it. If he has nothing to hide then show
it and make it all go away.

In my opinion, Trump is a chump. On this matter. Can someone explain to me how the BC thing is even an issue? Obama is POTUS so get over it. Its done.
Never in the history of America was there ever a president who didn't have opposition. A true leader or potential POTUS would never invest so much
needless time and nonsense on something so trivial as a birth certificate. It's a very weak stance which holds no substance. A true leader would look
past this controversy and forge forward into matters that mean most to America. It's childish, unprofessional, and would be expected to be a topic
among bingo goers in a smoke filled room. Or, the View.

I haven't heard Trump tackle any other issues except this. He's got one bullet in the chamber of an antique gun. Once he shoots it and if it
doesn't explode in his face, what else has he got? No potential president should invest so much thought and energy into this. It screams of
megalomania, delusions of grandeur, lack of political concern for USA and charismatic leadership. It's a non issue! If Trump isn't out of the race
by week one polls, then there is seriously something wrong with the collective.

Question from a non US member: who will be in charge, and I mean, who will be the most powerful man in the US when Obama is proven to be a fraud and
has to leave? How long would a procedure like this take (elections etc.) How long would there be no president?

Originally posted by jibeho
That's why I asked you the question. But I got no relevant reply.

What question? I didn't see a question in your post...

I have addressed these issues with my views many times. That's why I didn't reply to
them. And they're just my views. In the scheme of things they don't mean anything. But if you have a question, I will do my best to answer. Just let
me know what it is.

Originally posted by ahamarlin
Question from a non US member: who will be in charge, and I mean, who will be the most powerful man in the US when Obama is proven to be a fraud and
has to leave? How long would a procedure like this take (elections etc.) How long would there be no president?

No potential president should invest so much thought and energy into this

Not taking sides but.........NO President has ever spent the millions as did Obama in legal fees to keep his B. C. hidden

edit on 8-4-2011 by
Cloudsinthesky because: (no reason given)

I don't know about this and I doubt if it can be proven to be more than anything but hearsay. It really is irrelevant. It's just another convoluted
detail to keep the perpetual motion of another irrelevant detail. It truly is insanity. This is the banter of third graders in an adult body.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.